Talk:Little Voice (film)

Fair use rationale for Image:Little voice ver1.jpg
Image:Little voice ver1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

==

Little Voice
[Following comment was removed from the talk page of User:Horkana as it should be noted here in context. The comment was made after an attempt to simplify the English used in the article.]

You appear to believe that "marvellous" and "pretentious" are synonyms, and you don't err in thinking so. Besides, I'm sure that you had to rely on the Oxford English Dictionary - whose size is really impressive - in order to "correct" the language I used. Your efforts were otiose (which means "unnecessary") and preposterous (which means "totally ludicrous and laughable"). By the way, I prefer to interpret the comment "smart a..." as a compliment; it hardly freaked me out. Only someone with Shakespeare's genes could pen an article like that, couldn't they? And ... oops! "Freaked me out" wasn't the best choice of words, was it? Arolión Yolenda (talk) 12:31, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * There seems to be a consensus that dislikes how the article is written. See "the description is overflowery" edit summary 83.67.215.114, as he removed a comment "and this Wikipedia page was editted by a Smart Arse." by 62.31.21.235.
 * Congratulations on your impressive use of a thesaurus, but it does not make this a well written article. Keeping it simple and writing with clarity in a way that is easily understandable to your audience is a better way to write for an encyclopedia than showing off your ability to use complicated words or write in unusual ways. -- Horkana (talk) 14:51, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd just like to add to this my opinion on reading the article - it all makes sense and can't really be faulted, but there sure is some crazy language in there! Someone obviously spent a while trying to think of an idiomatic phrasing: "When he hears how LV's disembodied voice drifts down from her bedroom, he cognises her transcendent abilities and determines to pave the way for her career, although LV baulks at the vision of being hailed as a storied celebrity." for example, or "She discountenances LV's diligent singing with flagrant odium, and therefore continues to objurgate her daughter without cease. In spite of Mari's disheartening reprimands" - there is much more like this. Has someone done this for a joke, or just in an attempt to be interesting and descriptive? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.97.18.227 (talk) 16:33, 4 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Arolión Yolenda 25 August 2010 continues to inflict the most pretentious vandalism I've ever seen on this article. Editors should examine any edits made by User:Aroli%C3%B3n_Yolenda as they will most likely need to be reverted. The editor seems to be German, and presumably does not have English as a first language yet still fails to understand why it is important to use simple English that even non-native speakers could undestand.
 * Another editor describe it as sesquipedalianism. The aim of writing is normally to communicate ideas to others, using overly complicated words or a language your audience does nt undertstand is counter productive and a failure to communicate.
 * If despite warning and reverts these edits continue we will have no choice but to ask for the user to be blocked from editing. -- Horkana (talk) 14:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)